Citation Nr: 9823190
Decision Date: 07/30/98 Archive Date: 08/04/98
DOCKET NO. 97-31 597 ) DATE
)
)
On appeal from the
Department of Veterans Affairs Regional Office in Des Moines,
Iowa
THE ISSUE
Entitlement to service connection for Ménière’s disease.
REPRESENTATION
Appellant represented by: Disabled American Veterans
WITNESS AT HEARING ON APPEAL
Appellant
ATTORNEY FOR THE BOARD
Michelle L. Nelsen, Associate Counsel
INTRODUCTION
The veteran had active duty from June 1962 to February 1966.
This matter comes before the Board of Veterans’ Appeals
(Board) on appeal from an August 1997 rating decision of the
Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) Regional Office (RO) in
Des Moines, Iowa.
REMAND
The veteran seeks service connection for Ménière’s disease.
The veteran was afforded a VA audiological examination in
July 1997. However, it appears that he was also to be
examined for diseases of the ear by a separate examiner. The
examination report page of record states only “Exam to
follow.” An October 1997 deferred rating decision showed
that RO personnel were to inquire as to whether an the
examination was in fact performed, and if so, to obtain the
report. A hand-written note indicated that the report was
sent on November 1, 1997. However, a review of the claims
folder reveals no such examination report. If the
examination was performed, the report must be considered in
the adjudication of this claim.
In addition, the July 1997 examination report indicated that
the veteran would continue to be followed for Ménière’s
disease at the VA medical center in Omaha, Nebraska. The
claims folder contains only the veteran’s VA inpatient and
outpatient medical records dated through March 1996.
In order to ensure completeness of the record, the Board
REMANDS the case to the RO for the following action:
1. The RO should contact the veteran in
writing and request that he provide the
names and addresses of any VA or private
medical providers who have diagnosed the
veteran as having, or who have treated
the veteran for, Ménière’s disease. The
RO should specifically ask whether the
veteran has received treatment at a VA
medical center since March 1996. After
securing the necessary releases, the RO
should attempt to obtain those records.
2. The RO should inquire as to whether a
VA audiological-diseases of the ear
examination was performed in July 1997.
If so, the RO should obtain a copy of the
examination report.
3. After completing any necessary
development in addition to that specified
above, the RO should readjudicate the
veteran’s claim of entitlement to service
connection for Ménière’s disease. If the
disposition remains unfavorable to the
veteran, the RO should furnish the
veteran and his representative a
supplemental statement of the case and
afford the applicable opportunity to
respond.
Thereafter, the case should be returned to the Board for
final appellate review, if in order. The purpose of this
REMAND is to obtain additional evidence and to ensure that
the record on appeal to the Board is complete. The Board
intimates no opinion as to the ultimate outcome of the
veteran’s claim. No action is required of the veteran unless
so notified.
This claim must be afforded expeditious treatment by the RO.
The law requires that all claims that are remanded by the
Board of Veterans’ Appeals or by the United States Court of
Veterans Appeals for additional development or other
appropriate action must be handled in an expeditious manner.
See The Veterans’ Benefits Improvements Act of 1994, Pub. L.
No. 103-446, § 302, 108 Stat. 4645, 4658 (1994), 38 U.S.C.A.
§ 5101 (West Supp. 1997) (Historical and Statutory Notes).
In addition, VBA’s ADJUDICATION PROCEDURE MANUAL, M21-1, Part
IV, directs the ROs to provide expeditious handling of all
cases that have been remanded by the Board and the Court.
See M21-1, Part IV, paras. 8.44-8.45 and 38.02-38.03.
RENÉE M. PELLETIER
Member, Board of Veterans' Appeals
Under 38 U.S.C.A. § 7252 (West 1991), only a decision of the
Board of Veterans' Appeals is appealable to the United States
Court of Veterans Appeals. This remand is in the nature of a
preliminary order and does not constitute a decision of the
Board on the merits of your appeal. 38 C.F.R. § 20.1100(b)
(1996).
- 2 -